Money. Rip out Marx’s beard.
Each of us feels the influence of money not only individually, but also in the life around him in its broadest aspect.
Is there a time when a person does not think about money? Many books have been written about them, various theories have been created. Money is a human invention and, perhaps, the only one that has become beyond his control.
All (or almost all) countries have a public debt – that is, they owe money. A lot of different domestic actors, up to citizens, also owe money. The economic world crisis rests on money.
This means that we do not know everything about money. But money is a human invention, and therefore subject to him, like any other invention. Everything related to money circulation can be represented in the form of a mathematical model, and based on it, you can see and make the right decisions. However, this is not done either at the world (international) or at the state levels. We will talk about this later.
Now let’s look at modern definitions.
Definitions and functions of money
Money is a universal equivalent that serves as a measure of the value of any goods and services, capable of being exchanged directly for them. In its form, money can be a special commodity, a security, a sign of value, various goods or values, account entries.
Money is the universal equivalent of the value of all goods, a means of payment for goods and services, and a store of value.
… money is what they do. Anything that functions as money is money. Money is a universal commodity that can be exchanged for any traded goods and services and is suitable for settlements and payments.
D.G. expresses their disagreement with everyone. Egorov, Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, A.V. Egorova, Candidate of Economic Sciences:
Money is a legitimate measure of value.
In their work, for comparison, they give many different definitions of money. I recommend watching it – it’s very interesting.
Modern textbooks and science in the matter of money continue to rely on Marx and proceed from his definition:
The commodity which functions as a measure of value, and therefore also, directly or through its substitutes, and as a medium of exchange, is money.
Marx defined the main and other functions of money:
the measure of value;
medium of exchange;
instrument of payment;
means of accumulation;
Treasure formation tool (refers to other functions).
Marx’s "Capital" is based on a non-existent concept – value.
With the rethinking of economic theory, some scientists and researchers have questions about Marx’s theory. So candidate of technical sciences Vystavkin A.L. in his work "Defining the Functions of Money in Karl Marx’s Capital" concludes:
… Marx did not define the concept of "value", which means that its introduction into the text of "Capital" is unlawful. The concept of "value" is artificially invented and does not differ from the commonly used everyday concept of "value", that is, nothing more than its literary synonym.
Thus, at the basis of the entire construction of Karl Marx’s “Capital" lies a non-existent concept (value) and an imitation of an attempt to show a way to measure it.
Further Ph.D. Vystavkin A.L. explores the functions of money introduced by Marx and comes to the following conclusions.
… the first of the five functions of money named by Marx – the measure of value – is not consistent. Money has no such function. But also as a measure of prices, FIAT money gives "constant malfunctions."
A.L. Vystavkin makes an unexpected and interesting conclusion about the function of money as a means of creating treasures:
money has the function of forming treasures, but since both at the time of the writing of Capital and now money was FIAT, treasures have formed and are now forming the actions of groups of people who, in the end, carry out actions by force to make money with their own hands and force others to use precisely those made by them money and pay for their use. Forceful actions can be masked by more or less sophisticated procedures or replaced by threats. Gold bullion is also the property of these groups, as are many other properties.
Functions of money, explicitly unstated by Marx
In addition to the functions of money promulgated by Marx, Vystavkin A.L. finds in "Capital" three more, not explicitly announced. He’s writing:
1 “In describing the function ‘means of payment’, Marx makes the following reservation: ‘In the direct form of commodity circulation we have considered, the same amount of value has always existed doubly: in the form of a commodity at one pole, in the form of money at the opposite pole.
This doubling is the first of the indicated, but not explicitly announced, functions of money in a class-separated society, which the masters of money circulation and their ideologist Marx dreamed of. The presence “at the opposite pole” of the process of buying money, which can be made from nothing, but everything can be bought for them – this is the goal of monetary domination, from which follows the function of money from the point of view of the masters of money circulation.
2 The second function of money indicated by Marx, but not explicitly announced, is the function of mediation and material confirmation of contractual obligations.
However, from the text of Marx it irrefutably follows that one of the "parties of the contractual process" between labor and capital is in slavish dependence on capital, in modern legal language, incapacitated.
Thus, the function of mediation and material confirmation of contractual obligations under capitalism implies the conclusion of a deliberately unequal contract when:
– one of the parties to the contract offers its labor force for sale, under the influence of the violence of the "market", purposefully created for the production of this violence;
– one of the parties to the contract offers the market, purposefully created for the production of economic violence, a product burdened with obviously large rents.
3 The third function of money, indicated by Marx, but not explicitly announced and not included in his general list, is the transfer of social power to a private person. Here Marx speaks of the possibility of taking away the productive forces of society in favor of a private individual through money.
Recovery from Marxism
It must be understood that the theory of K. Marx was imposed on the world as a creed that has a provocative and imitative character. It is impossible to extract any real knowledge from Marxism. Marx’s theory is metrologically untenable and inapplicable in practice.
Marxism does not lead mankind to a brighter future. The goal of Marxism is to pit people (having previously called them classes and thereby dividing them), ostensibly with the aim of building socialism-communism, but in fact, with the aim of discrediting communism, limiting scientific and technological progress, and reducing consumption. And most importantly, in order to hide the true mechanisms of oppression of both of them and to preserve the crowd-“elitism”.